Re: [Nagios-devel] New Nagios dev branch?

Support forum for Nagios Core, Nagios Plugins, NCPA, NRPE, NSCA, NDOUtils and more. Engage with the community of users including those using the open source solutions.
Locked
Guest

Re: [Nagios-devel] New Nagios dev branch?

Post by Guest »

On 02/09/2010 09:43 AM, Ton Voon wrote:
>
> On 1 Feb 2010, at 15:56, Ton Voon wrote:
>
>>> Can you provide more details on what it is you are proposing to add?
>>> Synchronization stuff may make more sense being implemented as a NEB
>>> mobule or addon, so I'd like to see what's on the plate.
>>
>> Patch attached. Applies cleanly to CVS at the moment.
>>
>> While I agree that slave synchronisation sits outside code Nagios,
>> there are changes that are required to Nagios to support such a
>> feature. The patch contains the core changes required to Nagios.
>>
>> The idea is that there is a "sync_retention_file" which has slightly
>> different logic to a normal "state_retention_file", such as only
>> syncing if the last_check time in the sync file is earlier than the
>> retained last_check time. The sync file is removed when it has been
>> read. A new API is also added (SYNC_RETENTION_FILE) to allow syncing
>> when required. Comments and downtimes are searched based on "similar
>> attributes" (because id numbers will not be the same).
>>
>> It also contains test cases for reading the new sync_retention_file,
>> and some test cases for the new downtime search functions.
>>
>> I've included documentation both in the sample configuration file
>> and the configmain.html (which looks generated?). There's probably
>> additional documentation required as this is an advanced feature and
>> I'll commit to doing that if this is going to be included.
>>
>> Apologies for the code formatting. I'll clean that up if this is
>> okay to include in CVS.
>>
>> Comments?
>
> Any feedback? Some people might think there is a lack of development
> in Nagios :)
>

I'm kinda torn on this option. If Nagios is given the option to accept
check results via a socket rather than from temporary files, there's
no harm in having the checking daemons sit on a different server, with
possibly a feeder daemon in between to handle authentication, security
and multiplexing.

I'm for it, but I feel it would be redundant with a different fix.

--
Andreas Ericsson [email protected]
OP5 AB www.op5.se
Tel: +46 8-230225 Fax: +46 8-230231

Considering the successes of the wars on alcohol, poverty, drugs and
terror, I think we should give some serious thought to declaring war
on peace.





This post was automatically imported from historical nagios-devel mailing list archives
Original poster: [email protected]
Locked